Sorry if this is not the proper community for this question. Please let me know if I should post this question elsewhere.

So like, I’m not trying to be hyperbolic or jump on some conspiracy theory crap, but this seems like very troubling news to me. My entire life, I’ve been under the impression that no one is technically/officially above the law in the US, especially the president. I thought that was a hard consensus among Americans regardless of party. Now, SCOTUS just made the POTUS immune to criminal liability.

The president can personally violate any law without legal consequences. They also already have the ability to pardon anyone else for federal violations. The POTUS can literally threaten anyone now. They can assassinate anyone. They can order anyone to assassinate anyone, then pardon them. It may even grant complete immunity from state laws because if anyone tries to hold the POTUS accountable, then they can be assassinated too. This is some Putin-level dictator stuff.

I feel like this is unbelievable and acknowledge that I may be wayyy off. Am I misunderstanding something?? Do I need to calm down?

  • SwingingTheLamp
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Biden withheld funds from Ukraine to halt an investigation into his son and nothing happened.

    Bit of a refresher as it’s so hard to keep all of the lies straight: Republicans claimed that an FBI informant said that Hunter Biden took a position on the board of Burisma, and the Bidens took a bribe, in return for Joe pressuring Ukraine to fire the government official investigating Burisma. Nobody can produce the evidence, and said government official wasn’t investigating Burisma, after all.

    Pres. Trump threatened to withhold funds from Ukraine unless Zelenskyy dug up kompromat on Trump’s political opponents. He was impeached over it. So that happened.

      • SwingingTheLamp
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        That is indeed a series of events. Did they ever come up with any evidence linking them in a causal way?

        • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Well is there any evidence?!

          The title of the article is literally about the oversight committee demanding communication records as recently as last fall.

          Biden is a uniparty member and for all of this smoke he was never properly investigated by the justice department at home or abroad. Every inquiry is some anemic posturing.

          Special counsel David Weiss let Hunter Biden’s most egregious financial crimes elapse past the statute of limitations – convenient. Hunter was making millions overseas in Ukraine and moving it through Romania and China. He wasn’t investigated for years until he ended up picking up a gun charge.

          Why would an energy company in Ukraine pay Hunter Biden, a crack smoking drug addict, 50-80k a month if not for political access or a quid-pro-quo? Who is “the big guy” in Hunter Bidens email? Why were they trying to give him a plea deal that would absolve him of everything last July? If this were anyone that was not a member of the privileged class they wouldn’t be able to move due to all the investigation instead you are labeled as crazy for thinking this is old fashioned political corruption.

          Wikipedia dismisses it as a Russian disinfo conspiracy theory. Where have we heard that before? 🤔

          It goes back to my original point these people are above the law.

              • SwingingTheLamp
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I get the intent of such posts: To confuse and demoralize people with a “both sides” or “they’re all bad” message. I object because they discourage participation in the democratic process and serve authoritarian interests, and in the abstract, truth matters.

                • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  confuse and demoralize

                  Oh man now I’m a Russian disinfo agent

                  Discourages participation in the democratic process

                  Uh. As opposed to what? Pretending that a privileged oligarchy doesn’t exist? The bedrock of the democratic process is free exchange of information, no matter how inconvenient, and the enforcement of laws. Without one we are in danger. Without either we aren’t a democracy.

                  Truth matters

                  The “truth” is that Joe Biden is a member of a protected class. Despite enormous circumstancial evidence (including bank records indicating payments in excess of $20 million to Bidens family and associates) his house hasn’t been raided, his devices haven’t been seized, he hasn’t been brought in for questioning or made in anyway to feel uncomfortable outside of the headaches related to his son.

                  That’s why there is ‘no evidence’.

                  • SwingingTheLamp
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    I make it a point not to tell people who they are or what they believe on Lemmy, actually. And yes, Biden, Trump, Obama, Bush, et al. are certainly part of a protected class with special privileges. That doesn’t make them guilty of whatever their political opponents want to believe. These vague allegations of bank transfers are part of an investigation that’s been going on for years without turning up anything concrete, so claims that the Bidens have been protected from scrutiny don’t stand up.